Evaluation of risk by patients' and with clinicians' ratings: a CORE-OM and CORE-A investigation

Clin Psychol Psychother. 2011 May-Jun;18(3):244-9. doi: 10.1002/cpp.714. Epub 2010 Jul 21.

Abstract

While Whewell and Bonanno reported significant relationships between therapists' ratings of risk and patients' ratings of categorized Clinical Outcome in Routine Evaluation-Outcome Measures (CORE-OM) risk items, Rowsell and Stennett-Cox found that only two non-risk items of the total 34 CORE-OM items correlated significantly with reported risk behaviours. The current study of 870 patients examined the intercorrelations of the CORE-OM item matrix, including the 28 non-risk items, and their correlations with the Risk domain items. Additionally, CORE-Assessment clinicians' risk ratings were compared with the patients' risk self-ratings. The results differed from the findings of Rowsell and Stennett-Cox and provided validatory evidence supplementing that of Whewell and Bonanno. The Harm to Self items appeared to be of particular behavioural significance.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Validation Study

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Dangerous Behavior*
  • Diagnostic Self Evaluation*
  • Female
  • Forensic Psychiatry / methods
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Mental Disorders / diagnosis*
  • Psychological Tests*
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Risk Assessment
  • Self-Injurious Behavior / prevention & control
  • Statistics, Nonparametric
  • Suicide Prevention
  • United Kingdom
  • Violence / prevention & control